or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by SmileyDude

 I'm not against paying more for a better product, but that doesn't sound at all what you are advocating.  If Apple simply charged more for the mini without any changes to it, it would be just raising the price for no purpose other than profit.  Unless you are an investor in Apple or work at Apple (which probably would put you in the first category), I can't see why anyone would entertain that line of thought. Quality over quantity is fine -- increased profits for the sake...
     I'm not exactly sure of what you are getting at here... are you actually arguing for Apple to *raise* their prices on a product?  Where is the written rule that larger must also be more powerful?  There are people who value both power and size and would prefer not to have to get a bigger machine just to get the same performance/storage options. The mini already has some disadvantages that merit it's lower price -- the screen quality is not as good as the Air or even...
Remember last year when all the rumors said the mini would use a different chip than the Air? Here we go again...
 I think you might be romanticizing old tech here a bit.  I'm just as guilty at that myself at times -- I have an Apple IIe setup on my desk here at home, for example.  It's fun to play with old tech every once in a while -- I have fond memories of spending lots of time on the Apple IIs at school and in the library, along with even more time on my Atari 1200XL at home. But to claim things were actually *better* when we had only 4MB of RAM is pushing it.  Just think about...
Given that the DRAM has always been stacked on top of the A series chip, why would this schematic mean one thing or the other for any particular device? There certainly isn't any reason why Apple couldn't go with 2GB on an iPad and 1GB on an iPhone.  This could even be a version for an iPod touch or an Apple TV for all we know.
There is one huge difference though -- Apple is providing the technology for others to use.  This would be like getting pulled over by the cops for speeding because the taxi driver you hired is speeding. 
Really, it doesn't matter how the deal was structured -- perhaps Apple had to buy both entities to get the deal to happen. If all they cared about was Beats Music, if they really wanted to get their hands on it, they would have to spend $3B either way. Trying to figure out how much money they spent on which part is as pointless as trying to figure out how much money you spent on each of your kids during the past year...
I don't think that Apple moving the MBA to ARM necessarily requires moving it to iOS as well -- these are independent things.  Apple could make a ARM64 port of OS X for a theoretical ARM based MBA and to the average user, it would look identical to as an Intel based one (similar to how Intel and PPC Macs were). One interesting trend I've noted over the past few OS X releases is that Apple has definitely been slimming down the OS.  An install of Mavericks on a friends...
 There is one reason why Apple might do it -- Apple can squeeze out more profit/lower prices if they use an A-series chip on their laptops.  Combined with the ability to customize the GPU and other functionality on their own chip, they would be able to put together a system that better meets their needs than using Intel's solution. And combined with the rumors of Apple possibly using Intel's fabs, some of those other advantages would carry of as well.
New Posts  All Forums: